Sumter Provocation

"An armistice had been entered into between South Carolina's government and the United States government, December 6, 1860. A similar armistice had been entered into between Florida and the United States government, January 29, 1861. These armistices agreed that the forts, Sumter and Pickens, should neither be garrisoned nor provisioned so long as these armistices continued in force.

Papers to this effect had been filed in the United States Army and Navy Departments."

It's funny that tons of pro-Confederate websites have the above statement and they produce all kinds of letters and documents to support their view of Lincoln's "deliberate provocation" of war, yet not a single website has a copy of this alleged "armistice," "truce," "treaty," or whatever you want to call it.

I notice the fact that Bragg considered the armistace broken by end of March not mentioned in all of this. And the fact that it was a transfer of an enginnering officer to the fort that in Bragg's mind caused it and he didn't bother to inform the Union commander that he considered it over..
 
The purported agreement was negotiated prior to Lincoln's inauguration and the secession of Florida, and was in fact merely a temporary verbal agreement and not a signed armistice.
You intended to post this?
 
As already noted many times on this board and this thread, there was never an 'armistace'. If the word is being used to describe the agreement between Buchanan and SC commissioners, as between fellow 'gentlemen', then Buchananan himself, described it as unofficial and believed it of a temporary nature.
But, as far as provocation is concerned, SC as a free and equal state with all her sister states of the Union under the Constitution, had no more rights and privileges of any other state. Any state (including SC) had the full weight of the Constitution in seeking redress for any real or percieved wrongs commited against them by thhe National gov't or state. All they(SC and later the csa) had to do was avail themselves of their Constitutionally guaranteed rights and privileges. The only provocation for violence involved in the Sumter crisis, was the SC's adamant insistance to declare their independence by acts of rebellion and war.
 
Truth hurts...

Like your claim of a thing to exist in the OR, that appears on no page at all, in the entire OR.



Still using single digit maths that has no relevence to the maths i posted, as troll statement, on the actual maths used, i see.

Truth is subjective to viewpoint, maths is not subject to dispute only what it then means, just because it shows something you care not to admit to be the truth, you instead post like a troll instead.

Heres a hurtfull truth, if you could show the maths to be wrong, you would have done so.

Anyone who has declared someone else to be an idiot, a bad apple, is annoyed when it turns out in the end that he isn't.

- Friedrich Nietzsche
 
Lets see first how about Anderson's Or on 4/1 to begin with, but then you have statements from Doubleday and Crawford describing conversations to Lamon and Fox..

Already asked and answered. What i wanted to see was you use a primary record, there are plenty already posted, so i can show you where your question is already asked and answered, or if you have a one not already intered.

If your mathematical model doesn't simulate what actually happened then its flawed..

It does explain it acuaratly, if you disagree show me the mathamatical error. Dont just claim its flawed because you dont like what it shows.

Officers of the fort told people in Washington and anyone else they could write or talk to that they were going to run out of food by mid April..And this was all before April 7.. In addition, the private letter you produced mentions being on pork and bread and running out in 4 weeks...

Asked and answered already. What i wanted from you was actual cites from primary records that we have not valready covered.

If the Confederates were allowing all this food to be brought into the fort isn't it odd that they didn't mention that discrepency when they talked about Sumter running low on rations?
Which confedrates and when.

Ps. You still have not shown the post in which you say proves Anderson didn't want to be re-supplied becuase he had enough food and supplies...

Asked and answered.
 
Already asked and answered. What i wanted to see was you use a primary record, there are plenty already posted, so i can show you where your question is already asked and answered, or if you have a one not already intered.



It does explain it acuaratly, if you disagree show me the mathamatical error. Dont just claim its flawed because you dont like what it shows.

Asked and answered already. What i wanted from you was actual cites from primary records that we have not valready covered.

Which confedrates and when.


Asked and answered.
FORT SUMTER, S. C., April 1, 1861.
(Received A. G. O., April 4.)
Colonel L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General U. S. Army:
COLONEL: I have the honor to report that everything is still and quiet, as far as we can see, around us. The South Carolina Secretary of War has not sent the authority, asked for yesterday, to enable me to send off the discharged laborers. Having been in daily expectation, since the return of Colonel Lamon to Washington, of receiving orders to vacate this post, I have kept these men here as long as I could; but now, having nearly completed the important work of cleaning up the area, &c., I am compelled, in consequence of the small supply of provisions on hand, to discharge them. An examination of the accompanying report of the A. A. C. S. will show that the supply of provisions brought over would, had the issues been limited to my command, have lasted for a longer period than that mentioned in my letter of December 26, 1860. I have not made frequent mention of the question of our rations, because the Department was kept fully informed, from time to time, of the state of our supply. Lieutenants Talbot and Hall gave full information in reference to it when they went on, and on the 27th of January a detailed statement was sent on, from which any one in the Commissary Department could have told, knowing the number of souls in the fort, including the Engineer laborers, the exact amount on hand at any given time.*
I told Mr. Fox that if I placed the command on short allowance I could make the provisions last until after the 10th of this month; but as I have received no instructions from the Department that it was desirable I should do so, it has not been done. If the governor permits me to send off the laborers we will have rations enough to last us about one week longer.
I am, colonel, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
ROBERT ANDERSON, Major, First Artillery, Commanding.
This looks pretty much like an Or to me, wait it is since I copied it from them;and what is Anderson saying before supplies were cut off on April 7...

I told Mr. Fox that if I placed the command on short allowance I could make the provisions last until after the 10th of this month; but as I have received no instructions from the Department that it was desirable I should do so, it has not been done. If the governor permits me to send off the laborers we will have rations enough to last us about one week longer

Note the fact, that he describes talking to Fox, who was there in March 21 so here you have the commander of the fort saying he can last to the tenth on half rations,or the 17th if the civilians were sent away; and a similar story of food shortage said by other officers to Lamon a few days later...
So please tell me how you know more about whats going on then the officers who were actually there.. You claim that there was no shortage until the April 7 cutoff by the Confederacy, if this was true then why would all these officers say otherwise at least two weeks before that...Your mathematics do not represent what actually occurred thus your theories are flawed.He must not have been getting the amount of supplies from Charleston as you claim, and as Anderson complains about in several OR's...


Davis and others mentioned the shortage of food in Sumter several times in the OR's and never once mentioned this discrepancy. Again odd, if there was a stream of food going in...When Lincoln told them that he was coming to bring food, don't you think someone would have said "Hey they don't need food or something related to that" but no one did,or called Lincoln out on this .. They would obviously have evidence that Lincoln was lying yet they didn't produce any to show the world...Why is that? Its because there was a food shortage and the Confederates knew it as well....

PS.. So where is your proof that Anderson said he didn't want a relief force because he had enough supplies.. You keep saying you posted it, so where is the post number...I put this request in bold since you have ignored the last two or three times I 've asked you to back up this statement..
 
Wilber, all you will get is his "asked & answered" when he clearly hasn't. Thank you for using the OR & other period accounts. I for one appreciate it. I think B Peach just wants to go in circles, he hasn't proved his point and I don't expect he's capable of doing so.
 
Actually as a note you set the tone from your first posts on this board. Any who disagree you gleefully refer to as "idiots, ignorant, stupid etc." You reap what you sew and cleary you can dish it out but not take it. Some of us have thicker skin than others.

As you know it's Sumter not Sumpter.

As to my own linguistic skills: American English, a smattering of Lakota, Korean, French, Dutch, Russian & Turkish but my best foreign languages are bad english and drunkanese.

 
B Peach you have been asked this repeatedly: PS.. So where is your proof that Anderson said he didn't want a relief force because he had enough supplies.. You keep saying you posted it, so where is the post number...I put this request in bold since you have ignored the last two or three times I 've asked you to back up this statement.. If you can't answer man up.
 
The sad part about it, is that it is interesting to try to garner data like this from period sources, and could have been a really fun exercise.. The mistake is thinking that you have all the data or factors that could effect what is happening and when you set you with a pre-conceived goal in mind, which influences your data gathering and conclusions... The whole goal of Peach seems to be to prove that Lincoln had no cause in sending Fox's expedition, as Anderson had plenty of food and only experienced a shortage when the Confederates cut off his supply on April 7, due to the Fox expedition.. But, as can be seen from the diaries and OR's they were already experiencing a shortage and since they caluclated how many more days they had from their supplies on hand, then obviously they were not receiving much food by mid March anyway...
 
The sad part about it, is that it is interesting to try to garner data like this from period sources, and could have been a really fun exercise.. The mistake is thinking that you have all the data or factors that could effect what is happening and when you set you with a pre-conceived goal in mind, which influences your data gathering and conclusions... The whole goal of Peach seems to be to prove that Lincoln had no cause in sending Fox's expedition, as Anderson had plenty of food and only experienced a shortage when the Confederates cut off his supply on April 7, due to the Fox expedition.. But, as can be seen from the diaries and OR's they were already experiencing a shortage and since they caluclated how many more days they had from their supplies on hand, then obviously they were not receiving much food by mid March anyway...

Not unlike the poster who consistently takes a single sentence out of Lincoln's letter to Fox and, ignoring the rest of the letter, insists it's proof that Lincoln deliberately provoked the war. Or the poster who consistently takes a few words out of Anderson's orders and, ignoring the rest of his orders, insists it's proof that Anderson started the war by disobeying those orders. Can you say tunnel vision?
 
Not unlike the poster who consistently takes a single sentence out of Lincoln's letter to Fox and, ignoring the rest of the letter, insists it's proof that Lincoln deliberately provoked the war. Or the poster who consistently takes a few words out of Anderson's orders and, ignoring the rest of his orders, insists it's proof that Anderson started the war by disobeying those orders. Can you say tunnel vision?

And all of them steadfastly refuse to look at the things that Davis, Pryor, Pickens, Yancey, Walker, Wigfall, et al, were saying and doing.
 
...
In law, the agreement not to do so entered into by the Government of the US and the CS authorities, is a legal reason to use force as a remedy.
No legal agreement. No nation recognized the CSA as a legitimate government. Without recognition, there could have been no such agreement.

Breach of agreement is, sending the resupply is a breach of law.
What law? Cite please.


This is niether logic, nor what a argued, but whatever, starvation, the denial of rations is a weapon of warfare.
With this statement you assert that the US was justified in assaulting Charleston, not the other way around
...
Gitmo is solely owned by the USA since TR bought it, so no that is not the same thing at all.
Incorrect. Guantanamo Bay has been leased by the US government since around 1903. The US continues to send rent checks to Castro, who generally does not cash them. Castro claimed the original lease was not valid after his revolution. Ike said it was, and it remains observed by both parties. This is VERY similar to the situation at Sumter, except that Cuba's government is recognized by some foreign powers and therefore has a stronger claim than the CS did in 1861.
Korea is two seperate countries, so no that is not the same thing at either.
Here you state that the CS was not a separate country. I grant you that it was not recognized, but in 1861, it had the potential to become one and thought of itself as one. Consequently, the US forces were their tripwire. Fire on them: get a war.
West Berlin, was blockaded on land ( road and rail) by the USSR who held ownership of land that prevented ground traffic from crossing to West Berlin, so again your example is not the same.
And yet they are eerily parallel: Movement of military equipment and personnel in response to denial of rations. Stalin knew that to escalate further would bring a war down on his head. He did not want that.
Sending the relief fleet is an act of war, it breached international law when it was sent, and the right of self defence allows force to be employed as a remidy.
This is pretty clearly something you've just made up. What international law existed at the time? Please cite. Also, please explain how bread and pork are weapons which require a defense?
Just as if a person phones you and tells you he comming to kill you, you see him comming up your garden path armed, and you shoot him in self defence.
Um, no. It doesn't actually work that way.

120 days?, Anderson was not there for that period.

Since the amount of time is not a relavent issue except to determine how much supplies are needed to work out how long a temporal period they can last, i dont follow you at all.
You've made much of the amount of supplies, as if the quantity was cause for war. This is illogical. We appear to agree.

Logic is a progression of facts, knowing how many men for how many days eat x amount of supplies answers the question of lack or surplus of supplies, knowing at what point in time they go on to half rations, what level of supplies were furnished by civilian contractor to augment the existing stocks transfered from Moultrie arte all facts, and maths then gives us the answer to the question.
Simple arithmetic. You're entire argument revolves endlessly around an assertion that Anderson should not have been resupplied. There isn't any justification for this.
I dont think you know what logic is, and you certainly have failed to show it is not being followed.
Um, yes. Yes I do and yes I have.
 
FORT SUMTER, S. C., April 1, 1861.
(Received A. G. O., April 4.)
Colonel L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General U. S. Army:
COLONEL: I have the honor to report that everything is still and quiet, as far as we can see, around us. The South Carolina Secretary of War has not sent the authority, asked for yesterday, to enable me to send off the discharged laborers. Having been in daily expectation, since the return of Colonel Lamon to Washington, of receiving orders to vacate this post, I have kept these men here as long as I could; but now, having nearly completed the important work of cleaning up the area, &c., I am compelled, in consequence of the small supply of provisions on hand, to discharge them. An examination of the accompanying report of the A. A. C. S. will show that the supply of provisions brought over would, had the issues been limited to my command, have lasted for a longer period than that mentioned in my letter of December 26, 1860. I have not made frequent mention of the question of our rations, because the Department was kept fully informed, from time to time, of the state of our supply. Lieutenants Talbot and Hall gave full information in reference to it when they went on, and on the 27th of January a detailed statement was sent on, from which any one in the Commissary Department could have told, knowing the number of souls in the fort, including the Engineer laborers, the exact amount on hand at any given time.*
I told Mr. Fox that if I placed the command on short allowance I could make the provisions last until after the 10th of this month; but as I have received no instructions from the Department that it was desirable I should do so, it has not been done. If the governor permits me to send off the laborers we will have rations enough to last us about one week longer.
I am, colonel, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
ROBERT ANDERSON, Major, First Artillery, Commanding.

1st April Anderson refers to no requirement to go onto half rations, despite informing them he will exhust supplies by the 10th. When told that a resupply fleet was being sent.

Anderson replied to this news.
FORT SUMTER, S.C., April 8, 1861.
Col. L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General U. S. Army:
COLONEL: I have the honor to report that the resumption of work yesterday (Sunday) at various points on Morris Island, and the vigorous prosecution of it this morning, apparently strengthening nearly all the batteries which are under the fire of our guns, shows that they either have received some news from Washington which has put them on the qui vive or that they have received orders from Montgomery to commence operations here. I am preparing by the side of my barbette guns protection for our men from the shells, which will be almost continuously bursting over or in our work.
I had the honor to receive by yesterday's mail the letter of the honorable Secretary of War, dated April 4, and confess that what he there states surprises me very greatly, following as it does and contradicting so positively the assurance Mr. Crawford telegraphed he was authorized to make. I trust that this matter will be at once put in a correct light, as .
It is, of course, now too late for me to give any advice in reference to the proposed scheme of Captain Fox. I fear that its result cannot fail to be disastrous to all concerned.
Even with his boat at our walls the loss of life (as I think I mentioned to Mr. Fox) in unloading her will more than pay for the good to be accomplished by the expedition, which keeps us, if I can maintain possession of this work, out of position, surrounded by strong works, which must be carried to make this fort of the least value to the United States Government.
We have not oil enough to keep a light in the lantern for one night. The boats will have, therefore, to rely at night entirely upon other marks. I ought to have been informed that this expedition was to come. Colonel Lamon's remark convinced me that the idea, merely hinted at to me by Captain Fox, would not be carried out. We shall strive to do our duty, though I frankly say that my heart is not in the war which I see is to be thus commenced. That God will still avert it, and cause us to resort to pacific measures to maintain our rights, is my ardent prayer.
I am, colonel, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
ROBERT ANDERSON,
Major, First Artillery, Commanding.

There you have Anderson argueing against being resupplied. Do starving men ask not to be relived?.


This looks pretty much like an Or to me, wait it is since I copied it from them;and what is Anderson saying before supplies were cut off on April 7...

Yes its in the OR, and yes its all before supplies are stopped.


Note the fact, that he describes talking to Fox, who was there in mid March so here you have the commander of the fort saying he can last to the tenth on half rations,or the 17th if the civilians were sent away..
So please tell me how you know more about whats going on then the officers who were actually there.

Never disputed what Anderson said in that letter, just what it ment.

It just does not mean what you think it means.

Winfield Scott to Abraham Lincoln, Tuesday, March 12, 1861
(Report on Fort Sumter)From Winfield Scott to Abraham Lincoln, March 12, 1861The President has done me the honor to propose certain military questions, concerning FortSumter to which he desires replies."1st." To what point of time can Major Anderson maintain his position at Fort Sumter withoutfresh supplies or reinforcements?Answer. In respect to subsistence he has bread, flour, and rice for about 26 days, and salt meat(pork) for about forty eight days. Without additional supplies of provisions he may hold out someforty days without much suffering from hunger.

Thats April 26 on full rations acording to the head of the army looking at the QM reports, and very close to the maths i used to find the same. I gues the QM and Scott any myself all getting the same maths means we all cant count and you not using any maths can.
 
You claim that there was no shortage until the April 7 cutoff by the Confederacy, if this was true then why would all these officers say otherwise at least two weeks before that...

No i explained the rate of consumption of supplies doubled after the 7th, and that Anderson Qm reports do not return the same numbers of days of supply as Andersons gave, nor does expected date of exhustion, take into acount suppies now allowed into the Fort from contractor.

Your mathmatics do not represent what actually occured thus your theories are flawed.He must not have been getting the amount of supplies from Charleston as you claim, and as Anderson complains about in several OR's...

Yawn, you make a claim on maths but dont use maths to argue against maths, Scott got to roughly the same answer as i did from the same QM reports and rations.

Your childish claim is noted, it contradicts Anderson acount, the War dept payemnet and authorising of the contartcors to deliver, and we have letters telling when they are deilvered, and we know that when they are, consumption opf stores falls by 50%, if they are not eating anything else, they were on half rations therfore, which we know they were not, get an adult argument nota childish one.

This copy of the letter was printed by the New York Herald (New York, New York) on the front page of its April 5, 1861, issue:

Reported Letter from Fort Sumter

Buffalo, April 4, 1861

The Commercial Advertiser publishes a letter this afternoon signed "Johnson McNeill," a private in the army, who enlisted at Buffalo a year ago, and who is now with Major Anderson in Fort Sumter. There is not a doubt as to the genuineness of the letter, which, on account of the soldier's inability to write well, was written by a sergeant, and brought by a passenger to New York on the last steamer. He says:

"We have enough to eat and drink and sufficient to keep us for four months. Our fuel is scarce, but that is nothing. The rebels think we have been idle, but they nor anyone else will ever know how many men we have in this garrison. We have got sufficient to hold the fort against the whole South in a body. Major Anderson is a true soldier, and so are the other officers, and the men would die for him. I only wish we had a chance to give the rascals hell, and we can do it, too. If we ever go out of this fort, it will not be with the wish of our officers. As to sending us men and supplies, it is all nonsense to talk about it. It cannot be done. We are all right, if old Lincoln will only have the backbone to stand by us."

Your again not understanding answers already given to you, i posted Anderosn acount ofwhen Anderson had no supplies, when he was satisfied with them.

Heres the Workmen visiting Charleston on the 10th, 8 days passed when the board troll says they have no food left and are starving.
APRIL 10, 1861
THE SPRINGFIELD DAILY REPUBLICAN
WARLIKE MOVEMENTS AND RUMORS
The Washington correspondents for one day agree in their interpretations of the war movements, and assert that a portion of the fleet which ahs sailed from New York has gone to carry supplies to Fort Sumter. They say that messengers have been sent to Montgomery and Charleston to inform Jeff. Davis and Gov. Pickens of this design, and give them fair notice that if they resist this peaceful movement the responsibility of initiating war will rest upon them. The vessels were expected to reach Charleston harbor on Tuesday. If they are fired into they are prepared to resist the attack, and Major Anderson is said to be instructed in that case to open a fire upon the insurgent batteries, with the assurance that the government will sustain him at every hazard. Several laborers from Fort Sumter who were in Charleston on Thursday last, stated that there were in all thirty laborers in the fort, who are looking with anxious expectation for an opportunity to leave. They also state that there were seventy-two soldiers in the fort, most of tem Irishmen and married men; some of them have their families in Charleston. Nearly all the garrison are extremely anxious to avoid a hostile engagement, according to the statement of these men.

Do you think they refrained from purchasing any food while there or was it a sight seeing trip to ease stravation pains?, or did they wait for them to be delivered?
APRIL 12, 1861
THE LIBERATOR / THE BARRE GAZETTE

WAR AT HAND!
The last dispatch of our Secessionist friend at Montgomery leaves no room for hope of a peaceable adjustment of our country's intestine troubles. The Jeff. Davis Confederacy has resolved towage offensive war on the Government of the United States, and will assault or open fire on Fort Pickens forthwith. Meantime, the limited daily supply of fresh provisions hitherto allowed by Gov. Pickens to be furnished to Fort Sumter has been stopped, and we may hear at any moment that this Fort, too, has been carried by assault, or is so pressed that it must speedily surrender. Within a few days at farthest, the cannon of the insurgents will be battering down the defences and slaughtering the defenders of the American Union.
Let us pause a moment and consider.



PS.. So where is your proof that Anderson said he didn't want a relief force because he had enough supplies.. You keep saying you posted it, so where is the post number...I put this request in bold since you have ignored the last two or three times I 've asked you to back up this statement..

Anderson was orderd to request supplies should he require them, he never did so, he advised on number of aciasion against relief efforts. I started in post 242 with Holt and andersons letters saying this and have posted extracts from them for you till you kept asking for them again and again.



Haveing answered in in post 242 and every time i used a extract from Holt letter, you will find i started with the information you asked for and refered to it throught the thread.
Joseph Holt and Winfield Scott to Abraham Lincoln, Tuesday, March 05, 1861
(FortSumter)From Joseph Holt and Winfield Scott to Abraham Lincoln, March 5, 1861War Department,March 5th., 1861.Sir:I have the honor to submit for your consideration several letters, with inclosures, received onyesterday, from Major Anderson of the Artillery, and Captain Foster of the Corps of Engineerswhich are of a most important and unexpected character. Why they were unexpected, will appear from the following brief statement.After transferring his force to Fort Sumter, he addressed a letter to this Department, under date of the 31st. of December, 1860, in which he says "Thank god, we are now where the Governmentmay send us additional troops at its leisure. To be sure, the uncivil and uncourteous action of theGovernor in preventing us from purchasing anything in the city will annoy and inconvenience ussomewhat, still we are safe." And, after referring to some deficiency in his stores in the articles of soap and candles, he adds, "Still we can cheerfully put up with the inconvenience of doingwithout them for the satisfaction we feel in the knowledge that we can command this Harbor aslong as our government wishes to keep it."And again, on the 6th. of January, he wrote "My position will, should there be no treacheryamong the workmen whom we are compelled to retain for the present, enable me to hold this postagainst any force which can be brought against me, and it would enable me in the event of a war,to annoy the South Carolinians by preventing the from throwing in supplies into their new postsexcept by the aid of the wash channel through stone river."Before the receipt of this communication, the government, being without information as to hiscondition, had despatched the Star of the West, with troops and supplies for Fort Sumter, but thevessel, having been fired on from a battery at the entrance to the Harbor, returned without havingreached her destination.On the 16th. of January, 1861, in replying to Major Anderson's letter of the 31st. of December,and of the 6th. of January, I said "Your late despatches, as well as the very intelligent statementsof Lieutenant Talbot, have relieved the Government of the apprehensions previously entertainedfor your safety. In consequence, it is not its purpose, at present, to reenforce you. The attempt todo so would no doubt be attended by a collision of arms, and the effusion of blood -- a nationalcalamity which the President is most anxious to avoid. You will therefore report frequently your condition, and the character and activity of the preparations, if any, which may be being made for an attack upon the Fort, or for obstructing the government in any endeavors it may make to


strengthen your command. Should your despatches by of a nature too important to be entrusted tothe mails, you will convey them by special messengers. Whenever, in your judgment, additionalsupplies or reinforcements are necessary for your safety, or for a successful defence of the Fort,you will at once communicate the fact to this Department, and a prompt and vigorous effort willbe made to forward them. ( Anderson never request such supplies ever)"Since the date of this letter, Major Anderson has regularly and frequently reported the progress of the batteries being constructed around him, and which looked either to the defence of the Harbor,or to an attack upon his own position, but he has not suggested that their works compromised hissafety, nor has he made any request that additional supplies or reinforcements should be sent tohim. On the contrary, on the 30th. of January, 1861, in a letter to this Department he uses thisemphatic language: "I do hope that no attempt will be made by our friends to throw supplies in --their doing so would do more harm than good." On the 5th. February, when referring to thebatteries &c. constructed in his vicinity, he said "Even in their present condition they will make itimpossible for any hostile force, other than a large and well appointed one, to enter this Harbor and the chances are that it will then be at a great sacrifice of life:" And, in a postscript, he adds"Of course, in speaking of forcing an entrance, I do not refer to the little strategem of a smallparty slipping in." This suggestion of the "strategem" was well considered in connection with allthe information that could be obtained bearing upon it, and in consequence of the vigilance andnumber of the guard boats in and outside of the Harbor, it was rejected as impracticable.In view of these very distinct declarations, and of the earnest desire to avoid a collision as long aspossible, it was deemed entirely safe to adhere to the line of policy indicated in my letter of the16th. of January, which has been already quoted. In that, Major Anderson had been requested toreport "at once" whenever, "in his judgement additional supplies or reinforcements werenecessary for his safety or for a successful defence of the Fort." So long, therefore, as heremained silent upon this point, the government felt that there was no ground for apprehension.Still, as the necessity of action might arise at any moment, an expedition has been quietlyprepared, and is ready to sail from New York on a few hours notice, for transporting troops andsupplies to Fort Sumter. This step was taken under the supervision of General Scott, whoarranged its details, and who regarded the reinforcements thus provided for as sufficient for theoccasion. The expedition, however, is not upon a scale approaching the seemingly extravagantestimates of Major Anderson and Captain Foster, now offered for the first time, and for thedisclosures of which the government was wholly unprepared.The declaration now made by the Major that he would not be willing to risk his reputation on anattempt to throw reinforcements into Charleston Harbor and with a view of holding possession of the same, with a force of less than twenty thousand good and well disciplined men, takes theDepartment by surprise as his previous correspondence contains no such estimation. I have the honor to be, Very Respectfully,Your Obt. Servant,J Holt

Ive boldied so you dont ask the same question again.
 
B Peach you have been asked this repeatedly: PS.. So where is your proof that Anderson said he didn't want a relief force because he had enough supplies.. You keep saying you posted it, so where is the post number...I put this request in bold since you have ignored the last two or three times I 've asked you to back up this statement.. If you can't answer man up.

Troll wants others to do what he refuses to do, unlike you ive done it. Dont Parrot wilbers request which i have replied to, whilst refusing 4 times to do yourself what i have now done for Wilber.
 

Learn About Us
►About CivilWarTalk
►Contact the Webmaster
►Meet the Staff
►Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
►Register
►Browse Forums
►View Today's Discussions
►Search the Forum
Get Help
►FAQ
►Student Guide
►Forum Rules & Etiquette
►Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top